Abstract Rapid growth of the world's human population has increased pressure on landscapes to deliver high levels of multiple ecosystem services, including food and fibre production, carbon storage, biodiversity conservation, and recreation. However, we currently lack general principles describing how to achieve this landscape multifunctionality. We combine theoretical simulations and empirical data on 14 ecosystem services measured across 150 grasslands in three German regions. In doing so, we investigate the circumstances under which spatial heterogeneity in a driver of ecosystem functioning (an “ecosystem‐driver,” e.g., the presence of keystone species, land‐use intensification, or habitat types) increases landscape‐level ecosystem multifunctionality. Simulations based on theoretical data demonstrated that relationships between heterogeneity and landscape multifunctionality are highly variable and can range from nonsignificant to strongly positive. Despite this variability, we could identify criteria under which heterogeneity‐landscape multifunctionality relationships were most strongly positive: this happened when multiple ecosystem services responded contrastingly (both positively and negatively) to an ecosystem‐driver. These findings were confirmed using empirical data, which showed that heterogeneity in land‐use intensity (LUI) promoted landscape multifunctionality in cases where functions with both positive (e.g., plant biomass) and negative (e.g., flower cover) responses to land use intensification were included. For example, the simultaneous provisioning of ecosystem functions related to forage production (generally profiting from land‐use intensification), biodiversity conservation and recreation (generally decreasing with land‐use intensification) was highest in landscapes consisting of sites varying in LUI. Synthesis and applications . Our findings show that there are general principles governing landscape multifunctionality. A knowledge of these principles may support land management decisions. For example, knowledge of relationships between ecosystem services and their drivers, such as land use type, can help estimate the consequences of increasing or decreasing heterogeneity for landscape‐level ecosystem service supply, although interactions between landscape units (e.g., the movement of pollinators) must also be considered.
Significance Ecosystem services derive from ecosystem functions and rely on complex interactions among a diversity of organisms. By understanding the relationships between biodiversity, ecosystem functions, and the services humans receive from nature, we can anticipate how changes in land use will affect ecosystems and human wellbeing. We show that increasing land-use intensity homogenizes the synergies between three organizational levels of the ecosystem, namely, biodiversity, ecosystem functions, and services. Increasing land-use intensity changes keystone components, which are important for the functioning of the ecosystem, and alters the synergies and trade-offs between biodiversity, ecosystem functions, and services. Our approach provides a comprehensive view of ecosystem functioning and can identify the key ecosystem attributes to monitor in order to prevent critical shifts in ecosystems.
The abundance, activity and diversity of nitrifying organisms and the temporal and spatial interaction patterns of key players were investigated. Drivers influencing these response patterns were examined across forest and grassland ecosystems. In summary, dynamic environmental parameters such as land management affect activity and abundance, while rather stable parameters such as soil pH determine the community composition of nitrifiers across ecosystems. By shaping substrate-levels, drivers further determine the selection of interaction partners.
Trade-offs and synergies in the supply of forest ecosystem services are common but the drivers of these relationships are poorly understood. To guide management that seeks to promote multiple services, we investigated the relationships between 12 stand-level forest attributes, including structure, composition, heterogeneity and plant diversity, plus 4 environmental factors, and proxies for 14 ecosystem services in 150 temperate forest plots. Our results show that forest attributes are the best predictors of most ecosystem services and are also good predictors of several synergies and trade-offs between services. Environmental factors also play an important role, mostly in combination with forest attributes. Our study suggests that managing forests to increase structural heterogeneity, maintain large trees, and canopy gaps would promote the supply of multiple ecosystem services. These results highlight the potential for forest management to encourage multifunctional forests and suggest that a coordinated landscape-scale strategy could help to mitigate trade-offs in human-dominated landscapes.
Abstract Background Forests perform various important ecosystem functions that contribute to ecosystem services. In many parts of the world, forest management has shifted from a focus on timber production to multi-purpose forestry, combining timber production with the supply of other forest ecosystem services. However, it is unclear which forest types provide which ecosystem services and to what extent forests primarily managed for timber already supply multiple ecosystem services. Based on a comprehensive dataset collected across 150 forest plots in three regions differing in management intensity and species composition, we develop models to predict the potential supply of 13 ecosystem services. We use those models to assess the level of multifunctionality of managed forests at the national level using national forest inventory data. Results Looking at the potential supply of ecosystem services, we found trade-offs (e.g. between both bark beetle control or dung decomposition and both productivity or soil carbon stocks) as well as synergies (e.g. for temperature regulation, carbon storage and culturally interesting plants) across the 53 most dominant forest types in Germany. No single forest type provided all ecosystem services equally. Some ecosystem services showed comparable levels across forest types (e.g. decomposition or richness of saprotrophs), while others varied strongly, depending on forest structural attributes (e.g. phosphorous availability or cover of edible plants) or tree species composition (e.g. potential nitrification activity). Variability in potential supply of ecosystem services was only to a lesser extent driven by environmental conditions. However, the geographic variation in ecosystem function supply across Germany was closely linked with the distribution of main tree species. Conclusions Our results show that forest multifunctionality is limited to subsets of ecosystem services. The importance of tree species composition highlights that a lack of multifunctionality at the stand level can be compensated by managing forests at the landscape level, when stands of complementary forest types are combined. These results imply that multi-purpose forestry should be based on a variety of forest types requiring coordinated planning across larger spatial scales.
Associated data of the study "Towards the development of general rules describing landscape heterogeneity-multifunctionality relationships" (van der Plas et al, Journal of Applied Ecology). Files include:- datasets on ecosystem functions in 150 Biodiversity exploratories plots- data on abiotic factors in 150 Biodiversity Exploratories plots- R scripts to analyse the above data- R scripts to investigate heterogeneity-multifunctionality relationships with artificial data